In this chapter, I have related what I know about 2nd Generation Willis
and Jesse Harrells sons and beyond. I concluded in the previous chapter that Willis
had one son with him in 1800; he may have had more, and they may have survived childhood.
I only know, however, that he had one, and I have assumed he survived to adulthood. I have
also determined that Jesse had four sons, and the records suggest his sons were raised in
the county. Indeed, they may have stayed awhile as adults. This chapter is really about
their probable children, and grandchildrenthe 3rd and 4th
Generations of Hertford County Harrells. I have briefly set down what I know of the 2nd
and 3rd Generations, and then moved to describe and connect the 4th
Generation Harrells who may have descended from Willis and Jesse Harrell.

Willis Harrell (born before 1774)

Willis was probably the youngest of the 2nd Generation Harrells in
Hertford County. His only appearance in the records was in the 1800 census, and at that
time his age was given as between 26 and 45not much help. My guess is he was closer
to 26 years of age in 1800, judging by his relatively late arrival on the scene, and the
young age of his two children. His household was as follows in 1800:

1800 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:Willis Harrell, age over 45page 717

household
members: malesfemales

1, 0-101, 0-10

1, 26-451, 16-26

1, over 451, 26-45

(2 slaves)(in Capt. Moores Captaincy)

I have
speculated in the previous chapter that the male over 45 years of age in Willis
household was probably his fatherwho may well have been Elijah Harrell One. Willis
was gone by the time the 1810 census was compiled. If we assume Willis moved his family
from Hertford County after 1800, then he probably did not leave any descendants in the
county. In the absence of any evidence indicating he emigrated, however, we should remain
open to the possibility that one or more of the 3rd Generation of Harrells in
the county were his children. Also in the previous chapter, I also speculated that
Willis son could have been John T., Elisah, John (b. c. 1794), or Josiah Harrell.
With very little justification, I further concluded it was probably John T. Harrell.
Sadly, this is all I know about Willis Harrell.

Jesse Harrell (born before 1758)

Jesse was one of the older members of the 2nd Generation. He was
probably around fifteen years older than Willis, and was born just before 1758. In the
previous chapter, I proposed that Jesse was more than likely the oldest son of Elijah
Harrell One. He was among the first of his generation to appear in the [page 148] 1779 tax
list (see Table 9, page 109). In 1779, he appeared with William, Benjamin, Nathan, and
Samuel, but his property had a very different look about it. The others in his generation,
except for William, had invested in a horse, whereas Jesse owned a cow. By 1782, Jesse was
still the only one among them to own a cow, and his probable father, Elijah One, was the
only other Harrell in the county to own cattle (see Table 10, page 110). The 1784 tax list
indicates Jesse was well on his way to becoming a family farmer. Only he and Samuel of the
2nd Generation owned landI believe in both cases it was land granted for
service in the War for Independence. Unlike Samuel, however, Jesse was working his land
without the use of slave labor, which was also characteristic of Elijah One (see Table 11,
page 111).

By the time of the first U.S. census in 1790, Jesse and Elijah One were both still
farming without the use of slaves, which still set them apart from the other branch of
Harrells in the county who were more than likely of John Esquires family. At that
time, Jesse had three males, probably sons, under 16 years of age in his household; none
over 16 (see Table 12, page 112). They appeared to still have been with him for the 1800
census. In addition, in 1800 Jesse had a new son under 10 years of age, as well as the
three sons who were under 16 years of age in 1790. Jesse and his wife apparently still had
two daughters (see page 121).

By 1810, Jesse and his wife still had their youngest son with themthe others
had apparently taken their places among the other 3rd Generation Harrells.
Looking at both the 1800 and 1810 censuses, we know their youngest son was at least 16 and
under 20 years of age in 1810that would put his birth year in the range of
1791-1794.

1810 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household: Jesse Harrell, age over 55

members
of household:malesfemales

1, 16-261, over 45

1, over 45

(no slaves)

On the bases of the 1800 and 1810 information, we can list the following age
categories and combine them with possible matches for Jesses children.

age inpossible

birth year1800matches

son
# 11775-178416-26Eley, Elijah Two, Thomas Two

son
# 21775-178416-26Eley, Elijah Two, Thomas Two

son
# 31785-179010-16John T.

son # 41791-17940-10Elisah, John (c. 1794)

daughter # 11785-179010-16

daughter # 21785-179010-16

I have included in the list above, the possible matches between the members of the
3rd Generation of Hertford Harrells and the ages of Jesses sons. In the
previous chapter, I had isolated these possible matches from a pool of 3rd
Generation Harrells (see Table 18, page 146).

The following several sections of this chapter contain the information I have found
on Willis and Jesse Harrells probable descendants. Their descendants include five of
the 3rd Generation of Harrells, and they may connect as follows: Willis
most likely son was John T. Harrell, and Jesses most likely sons [page 149] were
Eley, Elijah Two, Elisah, and Thomas Two. From this speculation, I move to more
speculation about the possible and probable sons of these five 3rd Generation
Harrells. The sons of these five Harrells will, for the most part, be found among the 4th
Generation of Hertford County Harrells. The next order of business then is to look at the
pool of 4th Generation Harrells and isolate the possible sons of Eley, Elijah
Two, Thomas Two, and ElisahI have left John T. off the list because his will
survived, and in it he named his children. The pool of 4th Generation Hertford
Harrells are in Table 19 (see page 150).

As with the 3rd Generation, the 4th appeared in three waves,
starting with the census of 1840 and ending with 1860. I am pretty certain most of the 4th
Generation who stayed in the county were apparent by the 1850 and 1860 censuseseven
if they were not yet heads of their own households, their names and ages were available.

When I
have listed the father of a member of the 4th Generation in Table 19 (page
150), I have excluded him from the discussion of possible and probable sons of Eley,
Elijah Two, Elisah, and Thomas Two. The children of John T. are discussed in this chapter,
but their connection is not a matter of speculation. The other members of the 4th
Generation for whom we have identified fathers will be covered in the next several
chapters as known and probable children of the 2nd and 3rd
Generations of Harrells who are not encompassed in this chapter. I have also identified
those Harrells who were not born in Hertford County, because they are not likely to have
been the sons of the five members of the 3rd Generation considered in this
chapter.

In Table 19, for instance, we can see John T. Harrells sons, and the sons of
other Harrells with identified fathers; and we can see three other 4th
Generation Harrells who were born in adjacent countiesJohn (b. 1813), John P. (b.
1817), and Joseph B. (b. 1826). We can exclude them from consideration in this chapter
because they are not likely to have been sons of Eley, Elijah Two, Thomas Two, and Elisah.
That leaves us with just a handful of possible sons of the five 3rd Generation
Harrells covered here. These selected ones are listed here for quick reference:

4th Generationbirth firstlast

Harrellsyearappearanceappearance

George1791-180018401840

John
1804-181018301840

John1810-182018401840

Enoch1800-181018401840

Isaac181518501850

Joseph182918601860

William182518501860

William183018601860

With the
exception of John (b. 1804-1810) and William (b. 1825), the most common feature of the
selected group of 4th Generation Harrells is they were heads of households for
only one census, and then they were gonethis, of course, makes their relationships
to the other Harrells in the county even more difficult to establish. The discussions of
matches between the 3rd and 4th Generations starts with the easiest,
John T. Harrell, then covers the more difficult match-ups.

[page
150]

Table 19

Summary 4th Generation of
Hertford Harrells

Father/Censuses

county of birth183018401850186018701880

George
(b. 1791-1800)yesgone

John (b.
1804-1810)yesyesgone

Thomas
III (b. 1811)Elijah Twoyesyesgone

John (b.
1810-1820)yesgone

John (b.
1813)(Gates Co.)yesyesgone

John P.
(b. 1817)Powell** yesgone

Enoch (b.
1800-1810)yesgone

Isaac (b.
1815)yesgone

David Jr.
(b. 1807)David Sr.yesyesyesgone

Alpha B.
(b. 1812)Abneryesyesyesgone

William
J. (b. 1828)Abneryes*yes*

John (b.
1804-1810)Starkey Sr. (b. 1786)yesgone

Starkey
S. Jr. (b. 1827)Starkey Sr. (b. 1786)yesyesyes

James
Albert (b. 1822)Jamesgone

William
Bernard (b. 1823)Jamesgone

Joseph
Holiday (b. 1833)Jamesyesyesgone

John
Wilson (b. 1840)Jamesgone

Samuel
Martin (b. 1843)Jamesgone

Etheldred
(b. 1816-1820)John
T.gone

James
Thomas (b. 1816-1820)John T.gone

Asa (b.
1821-1825)John T.gone

Abner (b.
1826-1830)John T.yesgone

John
Whitmel (b. 1814)John (b. c. 1794)yesyesyesyes

Jarret
Norfleet (b. 1824)John (b. c. 1794)yesyesyes

William
Joseph (b. 1826)John
(b. c. 1794)yesgone

Marmaduke
W. (b. 1827)John
(b. c. 1794)yesyesyesgone

Andrew
Jackson (b. 1829)John
(b. c. 1794)yesgone

Joseph B.
(b. 1826)Reuben***yes gone

Joseph
(b. 1829)yesgone

William
(b. 1825)yesyesgone

William
(b. 1830)yesgone

Starkey
(b. 1835)Josiahgone

Nicholas
Jefferson (b. 1837)Josiahyesyes

*
Abners son, William J. Harrell, was never on his own; after his father died in 1864,
he was with his sister in 1870, and his nephew, J. O. Askew in 1880.

** John P.
was born in Bertie County, and was the son of Powell Harrell, the grandson of Benjamin,
the great grandson of Henry, and the great, great grandson of Edward.

*** Joseph
B. Harrell was born in Gates County, and was the son of Reuben, and the brother of Dempsey
K. Harrell.

In the previous chapter, I suggested John T. was possibly a son of Willis, Jesse,
or Nathan; but that he was most likely Willis son (if Willis left a son in the
county). Whatever the case may be, John T. Harrell did become a well established resident
of Hertford County and left numerous descendants there. John T. and his wife had two sons
by 1820 when they first appeared as a young family. John T.s wife was probably close
to 26 years of age, John T. was over 26 but under 30. Their farming activity must have
been large enough to need two farm hands, because John T. was working one slave. Our first
glimpse of John T.s household in 1820 contains the following information:

[page
151]

1820 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:John T. Harrell, age 26-30page 184

household
members: malesfemales

2, 0-101, 16-26

1, 26-45

(1 slave)

By 1830,
John T.s two oldest sons were at least 10, but under 15 years of age, and his family
was still growing. In this census entry, John T. Harrell and his wife show two more sons,
and two daughters all under 10 years oldthat gave them a total of six children. John
T. was still farming, but by 1830, he was using 2 slaves, which suggests he is a bit more
prosperous than a decade earlier.

1830 census entry, Hertford Co., N . C.

Head of
Household:John T. Harrell, age 36-40 page 400

household
members: malesfemales

1, 0-51, 0-5

1, 5-101, 5-10

2, 10-151, 30-40

1, 30-40

(2 slaves)

After
the county records were burned in 1830, John T. started the process of re-recording his
land in July of 1832, and the County Surveyor certified a map and description of a 43 acre
parcel of land belonging to John T. Harrell in November of 1835. His land was described as
adjacent to James Riddick, Charles Stenenson, and William Newsome (and perhaps Charles
Copeland).[1]
(Josiah Harrells farm, was re-recorded in 1834, and it was on Horse Swamp also
adjacent to James Riddick.) By 1840, John T. must have had more than 43 acres because he
was working 4 slaves which is not consistent with farming only 43 acres.

In 1840, John T. and his wifes two oldest sons and oldest daughter were no
longer at home. Their two youngest sons from the 1820 census were still at home,
howeverplus they may have had a new daughter since the last census. John T.
Harrells wife was missing from the 1840 census record, or she was mis-categorized.
Based on earlier censuses she would have been between the ages of 40 and 46 in 1840. The
census was taken around mid-year, and John T.s will was written in August of
1840and at that time his wife, Rose Anna, was bequeathed property in the will, so
she was alive when it was penned.

1840 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:John T. Harrell, age 46-50page 54

household
members: malesfemales

1, 10-151, 5-10

1, 15-202, 10-15

1, 40-50

(4 slaves)

[page
152]

John T. Harrell wrote his will on August 19, 1840, and it was probated in November
of 1846. He left most of his property to his wife, Rose Anna, during her widowhood. In his
will he put names on his children, but we still can not associate the names with ages with
much certainty. That is only important because in his will he treats his children quite
differently, and it would be interesting to know if it had anything to do with their being
the older or younger childrenor if he was just very upset with some of his children
when he wrote the will. His sons, Etheldred and Asa, as well as his daughter, Matilda,
were bequeathed only $1.00 each. John T. states that Matilda was married to Henry Modlin,
who would become a fairly prosperous farmer, and perhaps her lack of need determined the
$1.00 gift from her father. It could also have been that the two older sons were already
established by 1840, perhaps with the help of their parents prior to that time. In any
case, the bulk of the estate went to his sons James Thomas Harrell and Abner Harrell, and
his daughters Mason Cherry Harrell and Sarah Elizabeth Harrell. All his land and
plantation went to Abner Harrell.[2]

The will
was witnessed by William M. Montgomery and Benjamin Copeland. Benjamin Copeland may have
been a neighbor; Copelands farm was adjacent to the farm of Josiah Harrell on Horse
Swamp, and as pointed out above, both John T. and Josiah owned land adjacent to a James
Riddick. This land was near Josiahs farm, and John T.s oldest daughter married
Henry Modlin who farmed a large parcel on Josiah Harrells northern line. Josiah and
John T. Harrell were about the same age, probably cousinspossibly brothers.

John T. Harrells wife, Rose Anna, was born 1795-1804, and may have remarried
before the 1850 census. Rose Anna Harrell did not appear in the 1850 census, either as
head of her own household or in that of another.

Census information provides the following age categories for John T. and Rose Anna
Harrells sons. Their sons were Etheldred, James Thomas, Asa, and Abner; and they
were born, in some orderI have parenthetically inserted their names next to age
categories as good possibilities based on circumstantial evidence only. The matches are as
follows:

son # 1 b. 1816-1820(Etheldred)

son # 2 b. 1816-1820(James Thomas)

son # 3 b. 1821-1825(Asa)

son # 4 b. 1826-1830(Abner)

The
parcel map and description of John T.s land, drawn up by the County Surveyor in
November 1835, has the following at the bottom, to the left of the County Surveyors
signature: Etheldred Harrell & Asa Harrell CC. This probably means copies
were given to John T.s two sons Etheldred and Asa.

[page
153]

The 1830
and 1840 censuses show at most four daughters, and John T.s will clearly provided
for daughters Matilda Ann, Nancy, Mason Cherry, and Sarah Elizabethonly Matilda was
married when the will was written on August 19, 1840. John T. and Rose Annas
daughterswere born in the following ranges:

daughter # 1 b. 1821-1825 Matilda born November 21, 1820

daughter # 2 b. 1826-1830(Nancy)

daughter # 3 b. 1826-1830(Mason Cherry)

daughter # 4 b. 1831-1835(Sarah Elizabeth)

I have
also assigned age categories the their daughters, but with the exception of Matilda, I
have guessed at the order.

John T. and Rose Anna Harrells oldest daughter was Matilda Ann Harrell
Modlin, and she was a 4th Generation Hertford County Harrell. She was
identified in her fathers will as married to Henry [page 154] Modlin. Matildas
marriage is also described in the Modlin Family Bible.[3] The Bible indicates Matilda
was born on November 21, 1820, and she married Henry on March 18, 1838. Henry was the son
of Thomas and Margaret Modlin, and he was born on March 27, 1818. The 1850 census provides
a good picture of Matilda and Henry Modlins family at that time.

1850 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Modlin,
Henryage 32page 331

Modlin,
Matilda
age 29

Modlin,
Margaretage8

Modlin,
Mary E.age4

Modlin,
Emeline
age2

Modlin,
infantage 4/12

Modlin,
Margaretage 64

Henry
and Matilda continued to have children until Matildas death around 1859. Henry then
married Cornelia and had more children, but several of Matildas children were still
in their fathers household in 1860.

1860 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Modling,
Henryage 41farmer$1,750$2,429page 118

Modling,
C. A.age 20female

Modling,
Emelineage 12female

Modling,
H. S.age 10male

Modling,
D. A.age5male

In 1860, three of Matildas children were with their father and his new wife,
Cornealia. Matildas daughter, Emerline at the age of 12, her daughter, Henrietta, at
the age of 10, and her son, David Edward at the age of 5, were in Henry and
Cornelias household. By 1870, only two of Matildas children were still in
their fathers household: David E. and Henrietta Modlin. Henry and Cornealia had
increased their family considerably by that time.

By 1880, none of Matildas children were in Henry and Cornealias
household, and Henry had four more children with Cornealia after the 1770 census.

1870 census entry, Hertford County,
N. C.

Modlin,
Henry age 51farmer$2250$1500

Modlin,
Cornealiaage 35keeping house

Modlin,
David E.age 16farm laborer(Matildas, b. 1855)

Modlin,
Henriettaage 18(Matildas, b. 1851)

Modlin,
James A.age 11

Modlin,
Ursillaage7

Modlin,
Sarah E.age6

Modlin,
John B.age4

Modlin,
Eupratesage2male

Modlin,
Wilmerage 10/12

[page
155]

Henry wrote his will on June 19, 1899, and it was probated on August 31, 1903.[4]
It provided for: wife, Cornelia A. Modlinshe got 50 acres near Union for her use
during her life, then the land was to go to their son Raymond; their granddaughter, Sarah
E. Garriss, received 218 acres near his old home place; Henry and Matildas daughter,
Emerline Miller & her husband, W. H. Miller, received the land they were then living
on; Henry and Matildas son, David E. and wife Rosa A. Modlin, got the note Henry
held on their land satisfied; Henry and Cornealias daughter, Ursala Garriss,
received the tract of land in Bertie County they were living on; their son James A. Modlin
received some land in Bertie County; their son, Euphrates Modlin, received the land he was
living on; their son, John B. Modlin, received the land he was living on; their daughter,
Nancy E. White, received the land she was living on; their son, Wilmer Modlin, received
1/2 of the Old Home Place; and their son, Herman Modlin, received $100. In May of 1900, a
codicil was written to sell 92 & 1/2 acres of the old home place and divide the money
equally among his heirs.

Henry
and Matildas children were 5th Generation Hertford Harrells. Most of the
information about Matildas children came from the Modlin Family Bible except where a
reference is made to Henrys 1899 will or a particular census. Henry and
Matildas children, as near as I can determine, include the following:

Alfreds birth was recorded in the family Bible on August 5, 1839he was
named as the son of Henry and Matilda Modlin. He was not with Henry and Matilda for the
1850 or 1860 censuses. (There was, however, an Alford Reynods, a 40 year old, blind,
mulatto farm laborer living with Henry and Cornealia in 1880.)

Mary Ellen was born on October 15, 1846. She was with Henry and Matilda for the
1850 census at the age of four, but not for the 1860 count. (There was a Mary E. Modlin
age 28 in 1870, working as a servant for Moses and Mary E. Harrellthey were up the
road a bit. Mary E. Modlin had her 8 year old daughter, Lulu, living with her at the
time.)

Emeline was born to Henry and Matilda Modlin on April 22, 1848. She was with her
parents at the age of 2 in 1850, and in her fathers household at the age of 12 in
1860. By the 1870 census, Emeline was married to W. H. Miller, and they had a daughter,
Catherine, who was just a year old. In 1870, Emeline and her husband were farming on land
next to Harrell Modlin (age 60, probably Emelines uncle), who was farming next to
Henry and Cornealia.

[page
157]

By 1880,
Emeline and her husband, William, were still farming, probably on the same land. They were
still next to Henry Modlins place, just across Horse Swamp from Josiah and Anna
Harrell (the latter had turned their farm over to their son-in-law, Kindred Holomon, but
they were still living on it).

1880 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Miller,
William H.age 31farmer

Miller,
Emelineage 31wife

Miller,
Catherine A.age
11daughter

Miller,
Henry T.age8son

Miller,
Bettie A.age7daughter

Miller,
Ollie D.age5daughter

Miller,
Fannie B.age3daughter

Miller,
Rosa L.age 11/12 daughter

In his 1899 will, Henry Modlin left his daughter, Emeline, and her husband the land
they were living on at that time.

Matilda Modlin was born on May 26,
1859. She was obviously named for her mother, who died soon after the young Matilda was
born. Henry and Matildas daughter, Matilda, was not around for the 1860 or 1870
censuses.

David E.
was born on February 1, 1855. He was listed as 5 years of age in 1860, and about 16 years
of age in 1870. David was not listed in the 1880 Hertford County census, but he was named
in his fathers 1899 will along with his wife, Rosa A. Modlin.

This ends the discussion of John T. and Rose Anna Harrells daughters. Not a
lot is known about their four sons. I do not know the ages of John T. and Anna
Harrells sonsnor even their order of birth. I know the age categories from the
census, and I assume the order of birth by the order they were listed in John T.s
will. (None of their sons were in the 1870 census.) Etheldred and Asa were both given
copies of the re-recorded deed to their parents farm in 1835. This suggests they
were the oldest. It also appears that in his will, written in 1840, John T. gave the bulk
of his estate to James Thomas, and Abnerperhaps they were the youngest and not yet
established.

An Etheldred Harrell married Mary Odom in Northampton County on April 28, 1846, but
I have not found Etheldred since. He may have left a son (b. 1847) named Etheldred
Harrell. There is some difficulty explaining the 1850 census entry for Northampton County,
North Carolina. It reads as follows:

John T.
and Rose Anna Harrells son Etheldred was born between 1816 and 1820. He did probably
marry Mary Odam in 1846, and their first child could well have been born in 1847, and
named Etheldred Harrell. This could be their young son living with Marys brother or
parents in 1850. That would mean Mary Odam had a brother or father named Etheldred, she
married a man named Etheldred, and she named her first son Etheldred. That would have been
an unusual attachment to an unusual name. (The name also suggests a connection to some
early Harrells in Johnston County, North Carolina. In 1787 [the 1784 State Census], there
were three Harrells in the same captaincyone of whom was Etheldred Harrell.)

Abner inherited his parents land and plantation according to his
fathers 1840 willhe was 10 to 15 years of age at the time, so he probably did
not take possession of it for some time. We might expect him to have been in the 1850
census at 20 to 24 years of age, but he was not listed, nor was he in the 1860 census. The
only Abner Harrell I have found even close to the age of John T. and Rose Anna
Harrells son was in the following censuses entries. Their son should have been age
40 to 44 in 1870. The Abner in the 1870 census, was age 35though that is not a good
fit with John T.s youngest son, it is a possibility. It is a possibility because of
the manner in which I have had to estimate ages on the bases of the early censusesit
is possible that John T.s youngest son was simply listed in the wrong column in
1840.

1870 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
Abner age 35farmerpage 398

Harrell,
Rebeccaage 26

Harrell,
Willard A.age 10

Harrell,
Millieage7

Harrell,
Kittieage
4/12

The
Abner who appeared in Hertford County for the 1870 census was in Rich Square Township,
Northampton County by 1880.

1880 census entry, Northampton Co.,
N. C.

Harrell,
Abnerage 46head

Harrell,
Rebecca E.age
34wife

Harrell,
William R.age 19son

Harrell,
Mila A.age 17daughter

Harrell,
Rufusage 12son

Harrell,
Reubenage7son

Harrell,
Gicenshage4son

Harrell,
Herbertage 3/12son

[page
160]

The Abner Harrell in the above 1870 and 1880 censuses seems a bit too old for John
T. and Rosa Anna Harrells son, but he is the only possibility on the scene. Assuming
this Abner was John T.s son, his children were as follows:

William R. Harrell (b.
1861)5th Generation

Mila A. Harrell (b.
1863)5th Generation

Rufus Harrell (b. 1868)5th
Generation

Reuben Harrell (b. 18735th
Generation

Gicensh Harrell (b.
1876) (male)5th Generation

Herbert Harrell (b.
1880)5th Generation

Eley was 25 to 30 years old in 1800, and was not yet head of his own household in
Hertford County. If I proceed with the assumption that he was a son of one of the 2nd
Generation Hertford County Harrells, then he was probably living in his fathers
household. Nathan and Jesse both had a male in their household who was at least 16 but
under 26 years of age (age category 16-26) at that time. Eley would have just made it into
that category if he had been 25 years of age in 1800. The better fit, however, was in
Willis household; he had a male 26 to 44 years of age living with him at that time.
Willis was gone by 1810, and Eley was in his own household by then. The one factor in
Eleys make-up that does not fit Willis profile is the ownership of land. Eley
appeared with 228 acres of land; Willis was not on the 1784 tax list, and he was gone by
the time the 1815 tax list was taken. In other words, the timing of Willis departure
matched Eleys arrival, but there are no indications that Willis ever had the kind of
wealth Eley arrived with. As pointed out earlier, Jesse did have the necessary land to
provide Eley with the acreage he started with, and Jesses land holdings deceased by
about the necessary amount, when Eley appeared with his. I would think, therefore, Jesse
is still the most probable father for Eley.

By 1810, Eley may have had three daughters, and apparently had one son, all under
the age of ten.

1810 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:Eli Harrell, age 35-40page 106

household
members: malesfemales

1, 0-10X, 0-10

1, 26-451, 26-45

(1 slave)

According to the 1815 Hertford County tax list (see Table 15, page 134), Eley
possessed one slave and 228 acres of land at that timehis holdings had probably not
changed much from 1810.

[page
161]

By 1820, Eley apparently had at least three more daughters and two more sons. If
all the youngsters in his household in 1820 were his children, then it appears his three
oldest were the three young females who were with him in 1810, and his fourth child was a
son, also with him in 1810. Between 1810 and 1820, Eley and his wife apparently had five
more childrenthey were still neatly spaced, about one every two years.

1820 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:Eley Harrell, age 45-50page 206

household
members: malesfemales

2, 0-103, 0-10

1, 10-163, 16-26

1, over 451, over 45

(no slaves)

In 1820, Eleys wife would have been between the ages of 45 and 55, and by
1830, she would have been 55 to 65 years of ageshe may have been gone by 1830. Eley
apparently had a new wife between the ages of 40 and 50 in 1830, and with her a new son
under the age of five. His oldest son would have been in the 20-26 year category in 1830,
but he was gone.

1830 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:Ely Harrell, age 55-60page 408

household
members: malesfemales

1,0-51, 10-15

2, 10-151, 15-20

1, 15-203, 20-30

1, 50-601, 40-50

(2 slaves)

Eley was
back in the business of possessing slaves in 1830they may have come with his new
wife. Eley was no longer listed as a head of household for the 1840 census.

Once again, I am compelled to only consider the sons, and not Eleys daughters
because of the lack of information in the public records. The age categories of
Eleys sons as reflected in the 1810-1830 censuses, and their estimated birth years
are as follows:

Son
# 1 in 1810 was, age 0-10 born 1805-1810

in 1820 was, age 10-16

in 1830 was, gone

Son
# 2 in 1820 was, age 0-10born 1816-1820

in 1830 was, age 10-15

Son
# 3 in 1820 was, age 0-10born 1816-1820

in 1830 was, age 10-15

Son
# 4 in 1830 was, age 0-5born 1826-1830

[page
162]

We need to look at the 4th Generation of Hertford County Harrells to see
who from among them might best fit Eleys sons.

When
looking for Eley's possible sons, it makes sense to first look at the new households in
the 1830, 1840, 1850, and then 1860 censuses. Eleys oldest son was out of the
household in 1830, and one of the new households in 1830 was headed by John (b. 1804-1810)
who was of the correct age. Another possibility for Eleys first son appeared later,
however. From those who first appeared in 1840, only Enoch (b. 1800-1810) was a possible
match for Eleys son. Even though Eley was gone by 1840, his youngest sons may not
yet have become heads of their own households until 1850, or even 1860. When we look at
those 4th Generation Harrells who first appeared in 1850, then we can add Isaac
(b. 1815) to the list as a possible second son (Isaac is not a good fit, but close). There
is a possibility Eleys second and third sons did not stay in the county long enough
to have been counted in 1840 and 1850. Joseph (b. 1829) and William (b. 1830) appeared for
the first time in Hertford County as heads of households in 1860one of them could
have been Eleys son number four (see Table 19, page 150).

The age
categories for Eleys sons with the possible matches in each are as follows:

Birth year In 1840in 18504th Generation, best matches

Son # 11805-181030-3540-45Enoch (b. 1800-1810)

John (b. 1804-1810)

Son
# 21816-182020-2430-34Isaac (b. 1815)

Son
# 31816-182020-2430-34no match

Son
# 41826-183010-1420-24William (b. 1830)

Joseph (b. 1829)

Because each of the above possible matches for Eleys sons is also a possible
son of Elijah Two, Elisah, Thomas Two, and other 3rd Generation Harrells, I
have presented what little I know about them at the end of this chapter.

Hertford County had an Elijah Harrell reflected in the 1768, 1779, 1782 and 1784
tax lists, as well as the 1790 Census, whom I referred to as Elijah One. He was clearly
Elijah of the 1st Generation of Hertford County Harrells. There was no Elijah
in the 1800 Census, and then an Elijah appeared in 1810 at 26-45 years of age. I refer to
the latter as Elijah Two,and I have listed
him as a probable son of Jesse along with Eley, John T., and Elisah. If I am correct,
Elijah Two was Elijah Ones grandson.

If we look at the age categories for Elijah Two in the 1810 through the 1840
censuses, we can determine that he was over 56 and under 60 years of age in 1840. That
would give him a birth year between 1781 and 1784. By 1830, it is possible to determine
that his wife was a few years older than he was.

[page
163]

1810 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

Head of
Household:Elijah Harrell, age 26-30page 97

household
members: malesfemales

1, 0-101, 26-45

1, 10-16

1, 16-26

1, 26-45

(no slaves)

When sorting the names we have for the 4th Generation of Hertford County
Harrells and trying to match them with the known age categories for Elijah Twos
sons, we encounter more unknowns and possibilities than a normal person would care to
consider. In that I consider myself somewhat normal, I will only consider some of the more
interesting possibilities here in order to illustrate the task at hand and the enormous
amount of information needed.

When we look at the young males in Elijah Twos household in 1810, one of the
first things we need to consider is that they were probably not all his sons. Elijah Two
was but 26-30 years old in 1810; it is not likely the 16-26 year old was his son. The
young man may well have been a brothereither John T. at the age of 16-20, or Elisah
at the age of 10-20. In 1810, Jesse only had one of his sons still at home who fit the
16-26 year old categorythat was probably John T. or Elisah, the one who was not with
Elijah Two at census time. Another layer of complexity we must consider here is that
because Willis Harrell of the 2nd Generation was gone by 1810, his son, who
would have been 10-20 years old by that time, was probably living with a
relativeperhaps uncle Jesse, or cousin Elijah Two. Willis son was more than
likely John T. or Elisah Harrell. The 10-16 year old in Elijah Twos household is
young enough to have been his son, but even that is uncertain. Nonetheless, I will
consider him Elijahs son until I know better. The male under the age of ten was
probably Elijah Twos son. The simplification of this complexity can only come from
privately held information, out theresomewhere.

Elijah Two was in the 1815 tax list with no land and no slaves (see Table 15, page
128). His situation had apparently not changed much by 1820.

1820 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:Elijah Harrell, age 36-40page 184

household
members: malesfemales

2, 0-102, 0-10

1, 10-161, 16-26

1, 26-451, 26-45

(no slaves)

The male who was 16-26 years of age in 1810 was gone by 1820, and at that time, the
three new 3rd Generation Harrell households were: John T., Thomas Two, and John
(b. 1794). (Elisah did not appear in his own household until 1830.) The male who was 10-16
in 1810 was also gone by 1820, but he did not appear in the county as a head of his own
household in that year. There were two others, however, who were probably Elijah
Twos sons. I will suggest below that one of them was Thomas Three at the age of
nine. It appears then, by 1820, he had 3, perhaps 4, sons. In addition, Elijah Two had two
daughters by that time.

[page
164]

1830 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:Elijah Harrell, age 46-50page 397

household
members: malesfemales

1, 0-51, 15-20

1, 15-201, 50-60

1, 20-30

1, 40-50

(no slaves)

By 1830, the two youngest sons, who were under ten in 1820, were probably in the
15-20 and 20-30 age categories. Thomas Three would have been 19 years of age. One of
Elijah Twos daughters was gone, perhaps marriedthat might account for the
young male under the age of five. It is not too likely the youngster was Elijah Twos
child because his wife was 50 to 55 years old in 1830perhaps he was a grandson.

1840 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:Elijah Harrell, age 56-60page 61

household
members: malesfemales

1, 5-101, 60-70

1, 10-15

1, 50-60

(no slaves)

By 1840 it appears all of Elijah Twos children are gone. The two young males
were probably grandsons. Elijah Twos probable son, Thomas Three, would have been
around 29 years of age in 1840, but he is not listed as head of a household in North
Carolina.

I
believe Elijah Two was still around in 1850 living with his son, Thomas Three, in Bertie
County. In the paragraphs below, I speak of a Thomas Harrell Three who first appears as a
head of household in Hertford County in 1860. At that time, Thomas Three indicated he was
born in Hertford County. That is important, because we can match that Thomas Threes
family to the Thomas Harrell in Bertie County in 1850. The importance of the 1850 census
entry is its inclusion of Elijah Harrell age 81.

1850 census entry, Bertie Co., N. C.

Harrell,
Thomasage 43shoemakerpage 33

Harrell,
Eliz A.age 33female

Harrell,
Henderson W.age3

Harrell,
Priscilia A.age1

Harrell,
Elijahage 81

The first thing to note about this entry is there was no Elijah Harrell in Bertie
County in 1820, 1830, nor in 1840there was such a person in Hertford County for
those years as we have just seen above, and he was our Elijah Two. The age shown for
Elijah in 1850 is a little high. Nonetheless, the Hertford County Elijah Two should have
been over 66 but under 70 years of age. Thomas Three did appear in 1850 in Bertie, and
then in 1860 in Hertford Countyand he was born in Hertford County.

Again because of the practice of listing only the head of households in the
pre-1850 census, and the loss of the countys marriage records, I have only made an
effort to match the males in the 4th Generation to the age categories of Elijah
Twos children.

Son # 1 in 1810 was: age 10-16born 1794-1800

Son # 2 in 1810 was:age 0-10

in
1820 was:age 10-16

in 1830 was:age 20-30born 1804-1810

Son # 3 in 1820 was:age 0-10born 1810-1820

Son # 4in 1820 was:age 0-10

in 1830 was:age 15-20born 1810-1815

Possible 4th
Generation Matches for Elijah Twos Sons

The
members of the 4th Generation who stayed in the county and can be considered
possible and probable sons of Elijah Two are the following:

Birth YearAge In 18404th Generation, best matches

Son # 11794-180040-46George (b. 1791-1800)

Son # 21804-181030-36Enoch (b. 1800-1810)

John (b. 1804-1810)

Son # 31810-182020-30Thomas Three (b. 1811)

Son # 41810-181525-30Isaac (b. 1815)

John (b. 1810-1820)

The best possible match for Son # 1 from among the available 4th
Generation Harrells was George. Enoch and John (b. 1804-1810) are good possibilities for
Son # 2but Enoch is my favorite because John is a better fit as Starkey
Harrells son (see chapter 6). In an earlier section, I indicated that Thomas Three
was probably Elijah Twos son and, based on the age categories, he was probably Son #
three. Son # 4 could have been Isaac or John (1810-1820).

Because all of the above possible sons of Elijah Two are also possible sons of
Eley, Elisah, and Thomas Two, I have presented what little I know about each of them at
the end of this chapter.

The only 4th Generation Hertford County Harrell who was very probably
one of Elijah Twos sons was Thomas Three. Consequently, I have included what I know
about him in this section, rather than the section at the end of this chapter where I
discuss the other possible sons.

Thomas Harrell
Three (b. 1811)4th Generation

Thomas Three was in Bertie County in 1850 with his wife, young
children, and probable father, Elijah Harrell, with him.

1850 census entry, Bertie Co., N. C.

Harrell,
Thomasage 43shoemakerpage 33

Harrell,
Eliz A.age 33female

Harrell,
Henderson W.age3

Harrell,
Priscilia A.age1

Harrell,
Elijahage 81

By 1860, Thomas and his wife, Elizabeth, were back in Hertford County with one more
son, and one less father. Thomas and Elizabeth as well as their two oldest children,
Hendman and Millie Ann (Priscilla A.), were born in Hertford County. Their youngest,
George W. Harrell, was born in Bertie County in 1847.

1860 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
Thomasage 49miller$0$105page 61

Harrell,
Elizabethage 44wife

Harrell,
Hendmanage 13son

Harrell,
M. A. age 12daughter

Harrell,
Geo. W.age 10son

Thomas Three was gone by 1870, and Elizabeth Ann was living with their son-in-law,
William H. Harrell, and their daughter, Amelia Ann Harrell. Thomas Three and Elizabeth did
not own land and only had $105 worth of personal property in 1860. They could not have
left much to their sons, which might have tied them to the county.

By 1880, Henderson was in White County, Arkansas with his wife and two daughters.
Judging by the age and place of birth for his daughter, Sarah, he was in Arkansas by 1874.
Hendersons sister was with him and his family in 1880I do not know yet what
became of her family.

Millie Ann Harrell, the daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth Harrell, married William
H. Harrell on November 12, 1868 in Hertford County.[5] At the recording of the
wedding, William was listed as the son of John and Delilah Harrell (John was probably not
Williams father, but because John was Delilahs current husband he was given
the honor). Millie and William Harrells household in 1870 was as follows:

1870 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
W. H.age 27farm laborerpage 433

Harrell,
Amelia A.age
20

Harrell,
Thomas H.age
4/12

Harrell,
Elizabethage 50

They were not in Hertford County for the 1880 or 1900 censuses. Millie Ann was with
her brother, Henderson, and sister-in-law in Arkansas for the 1880 censusshe may
have been visiting, or perhaps she had lost her husband and son, Thomas. (For further
discussion of Millie Ann and William H. Harrells family, see William H. Harrell in
the section on George, Isaac, John, and Delilah Harrell later in this chapter.)

Elisah was one of the youngest members of the 3rd Generation of Hertford
County Harrells, but apparently he did not stay in the county long after establishing his
family around 1810. He could have been a son of Willis, Jesse, or Nathan. Most likely he
was the son of Willis or Jesse. Elisah simply did not appear often enough in the records
to give any indications. He appeared as a head of household only once, 1830. He probably
moved from the area, but there is always the chance he died soon after 1830, and his widow
remarried before 1840 leaving no tracks under the name of Harrell. In the latter case,
Elisahs son would not have appeared in the records until he became head of a
household and was listed in the 1840 census.

The glimpse we have of Elisahs family is interesting. He emerged on the scene
when he was between 30 and 40 years of ageapparently with a son born before the 1810
census. If that was the case, where were they in 1820? There were three Elisah Harrells in
North Carolina in 1820: one in each of the

[page
168]

1830 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:Elisah Harrell, age 30-40page 415

household
members: malesfemales

1, 15-201, 5-10

1, 30-401, 30-40

(no slaves)

following
counties, Edgecombe, Gates, and Bertie. None of the three Elisah Harrell families were
close to a match with the Hertford County Elisah in 1830. I assume, then he was raised in
Hertford County, and thus should have been there in 1820 at the age of 20-30 with a wife
of the same age, and a son in the age category of 5-10. The only Harrell household in the
county with people in those age categories, who were not heads of a household, was David
Seniors. David Sr. and his wife were both in the age category of 45-50, and they had
a male and female with them between the ages of 16-25, but they did not have a male
between the ages of 5 and nine. They did have two males between the ages of 10 and 15, but
they could have been Davids children. It is still possible that Elisah was
Davids son, but not too probable at this point.

All we know about Elisahs children is that by 1830 he apparently had one son,
and one daughter. Their birth years and the best possible match for their son are listed
below.

Birth YearAge In 18304th Generation, best matches

Son 1811-181515-20John (b. 1810-1820)

Isaac (b. 1815)

Daughter
1821-18255-10

Elisahs possible son among the 4th Generation was John (b.
1810-1820), or Isaac (b. 1815). The other members of the 4th Generation either
did not fit the age category or had a know father who was not Elisah.

Thomas Two was one of the oldest, if not the oldest, in the 3rd
Generation. That, combined with his name, suggests that perhaps he descended from Adam
Senior, or one of his sonsperhaps Adam Jr. or Thomas One. Jesse and Nathan, however,
have to remain on the list of possible fathers, based solely on age categories.

Other
possible relatives based on the use of the name, Thomas, are John T. and Elijah
Twothey could have been Thomas Twos brothers or cousins. John T. had a son
named James Thomas Harrell, and a grandson named Henry Thomas Modlin; Elijah Two named a
son Thomas Harrell (Thomas Three). There is always the possibility they are all
relatedperhaps descending from Adam Harrell Senior.

[page
169]

Thomas
Two first appeared in the records on the 1815 Hertford County tax list with no slaves and
100 acres of land (see Table 15, page 128). His only other appearance was in the 1820
censusat that time, he was over 45 years of age but had what appeared to have been a
relatively young familythree sons under the age of ten.

1820 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:Thomas Harrell, age over 45page 192

household
members:malesfemales

3, 0-101, over 45

1, over 45

(no slaves)

Thomas Harrell
Twos Possible and Probable Children

Thomas Two was gone by 1830, and there was no Harrell widow that year with a family
profile that might have fit their family in the 1820 census. If he died between 1820 and
1830, his widow could have remarried and had Thomas Twos children in a non-Harrell
household. The other possibility, of course, is that he packed up his family and moved
from the county. The latter is less likely than with some others of his generation,
because he owned some land. In any case, if we assume he stayed in the county until the
end, then he probably left some children there.

Based only on the information in the 1820 census entry, Thomas Two had three sons
ages nine or under. If we assume normal spacing, they could have been around the ages of2, 5, and8
in 1820. If this assumption is correct, then his family by that time looked something like
this:

Birth YearAge In 18204th Generation, best matches

Son
# 11811-1820around 8John (b. 1810-1820)

Son
# 21811-1820around 5John (b. 1810-1820)

Isaac (b.
1815)

Son
# 31811- 1820around 2John (b. 1810-1820)

4th Generation
Matches with Their Possible Fathers

In the previous several sections, I have determined the age categories for the sons
of Eley, Elijah Two, Elisah, and Thomas Two. I also speculated about the best possible
matches with 4th Generation Harrells who did not already have identified
fathers. The results are summarized in table 20 below.

[page 170]

Table 20

:

Summary
of 4th Generation Matches With Possible Fathers

4th Generation HarrellsTheir Possible and Probable Fathers

George (b. 1791-1800)Elijah Twos son # 1;

Elisahs son.

John (b. 1804-1810) Eleys son # 1;

Elijah Twos son # 2.

John (b. 1810-1820)Elijah Twos son # 3;

Thomas Twos sons # 1, 2, and 3.

Enoch (b. 1800-1810) Eleys son # 1;

Elijah Twos son # 2.

Isaac (b. 1815) Elijah Twos son # 4;

Elisahs son;

Thomas Twos son #2.

Joseph (b. 1829) Eleys son # 4.

William (b. 1830)Eleys son #4.

It is not surprising to find that John (b. 1810-1820), is listed with several
possible fathers, due to the broad range of years in his estimated birth year. It is,
however, curious that with just as broad a range, Enoch (b. 1800-1810) appeared with only
two possible fathersEley or Elijah Two Harrell. In Joseph and William Harrells
cases, we have a very narrow set of possible fathers, but they must remain at this point,
just very good possibilities, not quite probable relationships.

There are three other possible fathers for the un-matched 4th Generation
Harrells. Josiah Harrells sons numbers two and threethey were no longer in his
household by 1850, so there is no easy record of their namesthey were born around
1823 and 1825 (see chapter 8). Another possible father not considered in this chapter is
David Harrell Seniorhe also has unidentified children (see chapter 10). A third
possible father for the un-matched 4th Generation Harrells is Starkey S.
Harrell Senior (see chapter 6).

The Unattached 4th
Generation Harrells Considered in This Chapter

The following sections of this chapter are for the 4th Generation
Harrells whom I have not been able to convincingly connect to one of the 3rd
Generation households in the county. I will repeat the list of them here, and then
describe what I know of them.

In the earlier parts of this chapter, we found that this John Harrell fit the age
categories for Eleys # 1 son, and Elijah Twos #2 son. To that I must also add
that John (b. 1804-1810) Harrells age was a good fit for a couple of the 3rd
Generation Hertford County Harrell households not covered in this chapter. The age
category for his birth year fit the age categories for an unidentified son in the Starkey
S. Harrell Sr. or the David Harrell Sr. households which are covered in chapters 6 and 10
respectively.

John (b.
1804-1810) and his wife, Harriet, established their household just before the 1830 census
was taken; they had no children at that time, but possessed considerable wealthwhich
must have been inherited. The only 3rd Generation Harrell households with such
wealth in 1820 was Starkey Sharp Harrell Sr. and David Harrell Senior. Davids
household had two males in the age category that fits Johns agetherefore,
10-16 years of age in 1820 (David Jr. was 13 years old at the time). The problem is,
Starkey S. Harrell also had an unidentified son in the same age category in 1820.

An argument in favor of John (b. 1804-1810) having been Starkey S. Harrells
son can be made based on the fact that John was living just three households from
Starkeys widow, Elizabeth, in 1830. The argument for John (b. 1804-1810) having been
a son of David Harrell is based on association. A John Harrell attended the estate sale of
G. M. Smith on December 5, 1832. Also in attendance was David Harrell Senior. John bought
1 Damaged Leather for $1.75, and David bought 6 sides of Leather
for $1.26.[6]
The other connection between John (b. 1804-1810) and David was in 1850 when Davids
son, David Jr., had John (b. 1804-1810) Harrells son, Alphenis, living with him
after John (b. 1804-1810) had died in late 1840.

Regardless of who Johns parents were, John and his wife, Harriet, began their
household in Hertford County just before 1830. According to the 1830 census, John Harrell
was born between 1800 and 1810.

1830 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:John Harrell, age 20-30page 416

household
members: malesfemales

1, 20-301, 15-20

(14 slaves)(3 dwellings from Elizabeth)

On October 18, 1832, the Entry Taker for Hertford County commissioned a surveyor,


to Survey and lay off for John Harrell a tract of land . In pursuant to an Act of the
General Assembly of the State of North Carolina passed for those that might Suffer from
the Burning of the Records of Hertford County and Bounded as follows: Beginning at the
mouth of Mill gut [It is called Mill Swamp on the Survey map.] on Wiccacon Creek
thence up the said gat or Swamp along said Harrells line to William Wards Pine Land
then along said Wards line or land to Silas Smiths line thence along said Smiths line to
Henry Kensey line thence along Kensey line to William Wards line thence Wards line to the
said Kensey line or land on Gum Neck and from thence to Wiccacon Creek .

[page
172]

The letter
of commission was dated July 10, 1834. The Survey indicates that Johns tract
contained 352 acres. On S. side of Wicacon Creek.[7]
Of course, the letter and survey map give no indication from whom John got the land in
question.

John and
Herriet were still in the County for the 1840 census and apparently had three children by
that time.

1840 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:John Harrell, age 30-40page 50

household
members: malesfemales

2, 5-101, 0-5

1, 30-401, 15-20

1, 30-40

(12 slaves)

The two males ages 5 through 9 were
John Wilson (age 8) and Alpheus (age 5). The young female was daughter, Celia (about the
age of 3). The 15 to 20 year old female living with them in 1840 could have been a sister
or niece.The male age 30-40 was John
himself, and his wife was also 30-40 years of age.

John was probably in failing health at the time of this census. He wrote his will
September 23, 1840, and it was probated in the February Term of 1841. In his will he
provides for his wife, Harriet, and his children John Wilson Harrell, Alpheus Harrell and
Celia Harrell.[8]
There is also some mention of a yet unborn child. Harriet was 15 to 20 years of age for
the 1830 census, so would have had to be 25 to 30 in 1840. She was actually listed as 30
to 40 in the 1840 census, so she was probably about 30 years of age when John died, and
she more than likely remarried. According to the will the slaves were to be divided
between John Wilson and Alpheus when they came of age.

Sons John Wilson and Alpheus were not of age by the 1850 censusthey were
between the ages of 15 and 20. Alpheus at the age of 15 was living with David Harrell Jr.
(perhaps his uncle) for the 1850 census. John Wilson was 18 years old and living in
Northampton County as a student. I have not yet found their daughter, Celia, who would
have been 10 to 15 years old in 1850, nor have I found Johns widow, Herriet, in
North Carolina for the 1850 census.

According
to Johns will, and supported by the census information, their children were:

John Wilson Harrellborn 1831

Alpheus Harrellborn 1835

Celia Harrellborn 1837

[page
173]

Birth year and generation coincide less and less each generation. John Wilson
Harrell (b. 1831) was technically a 5th Generation Hertford County Harrell, but
he was older than many of the 4th Generation Harrells. This, of course, is
largely due to the fact his father, John (b. 1804-1810), was among the first sons of
either Starkey Sr. or David Sr.both of whom were among the oldest of the 3rd
Generation. For instance, in 1880, 5th Generation, John Wilson Harrell, was a
neighbor of 4th Generation, Nicholas J. Harrell, but Nicholas was six years
younger than John Wilson Harrell.

I know John Wilson Harrell was the son of John (born 1804-1810) and Herriet
Harrell, and that he was born in 1831. It is important to keep a handle on John Wilson
Harrells date of birth because Hertford County documents show three John W.
Harrells, and, indeed, two John Wilson Harrells in roughly the same time period. The
oldest was John Whitmell Harrell (b. 1814 and son of John [b. c. 1794] and Winnefred). The
next was John Wilson Harrell (b. July 1831, the focus of this section), and the third was
also John Wilson Harrell (b. 1840, a son of James Harrell [b. 1792]).

Because
John (b. 1831) was not with his mother in 1850, there is a bit of uncertainty about his
location, but I believe he was the John W. Harrell, age 18, in Northampton County in 1850,
living with a Barns family. He was listed as a student, so the family he was living with
may not have been relatives. The Barns family was financially sound and had probably hired
a teacher from Maine for their children and were making good use of him with John and
perhaps others.

1850 Census entry, Northampton, Co.,
N. C.

Barns,
Collin W. 67 farmer$13,778Va.page 54

Barns,
Lousia55Va.

Barns,
Joseph B.13N. C.

Barns,
George B.11N. C.

Bonds,Benjamin22 teaching schoolMaine

Harrell,
John W.18 studentN. C.

Jordan,
Thomas 15N. C.

Wood, Spinx
W. 11 (male)N. C.

Debury,
Edmond 12 N. C.

[page
174]

John Wilson Harrell must have moved from Northampton to Chowan County in the early
1850s, because he married Mary Haughton there on November 10, 1853.[9]
At this point, I am assuming that Mary Haughton becomes Mary E. S. Harrell, the wife of
John W. Harrell in the 1860-1900 censuses.[10] His wife, Mary E. S., and
their first child, Selwyn T., were born in Chowan County, which means they stayed in
Chowan through 1855. They were in Hertford County by 1858 for the birth of their second
son, Joseph E. Harrell.

John Wilson initiated a survey of his farm in 1854probably while he was still
in Chowan County. The comparison of the survey made in 1854 makes it clear that it was the
same farm his parents were on in the 1830s. It was the same farm his father had surveyed
in 1834 (see note number 7 in this chapter). John Wilson Harrells request was
entered on October 5, 1854, and issued March 14, 1855. It included the following:


to Survey and lay off for John Wilson Harrell of this County of Wiccacon Creek
bounded by said Creek by Mrs. Cuude of James Harrell (a his wife) by the
lands of Watson Lewis and by the lands of Abner Harrell Trustee. And containing about two
hundred and fifty acres and being the tract descended from Maudoden Lewten to Mary
Ann his daughter who and the wife of John Harrell descended. (Most of the letter is
very hard to read.)

The actual
survey came up with 309 acres, bounded on the east by Old Mill Run; on the northwest by
Wiccacon Creek; by Mrs. Ann Harrell (Abners daughter-in-law) on southeast corner; by
James Harrell (Abners brother) and Matthew (Watson?) Lewis corner and line.[11]
The most curious comment in the survey apparently indicates that the land came from
Marys father, but it resembles the land surveyed by Johns father in 1834.

1860 was the first time John Wilson and Mary E. S. Harrells household
appeared in a census in Hertford County. Their two sons had been born by census time. As I
mentioned above, John Wilson Harrells father, John, had died in 1840 and left most
of his wealth to his sons, Alpheus and John Wilson. This is evident by the large amount of
wealth John Wilson possessed in 1860. In fact, judging by the amount of wealth John Wilson
had in 1860, I suspect he ended up with most of his fathers propertyhis
wealth, both real estate and personal, exceeded that of the well established David Harrell
who was still head of his household in 1860.

1860 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
Jno. W.age 29Farmer$4,500$20,265page 107

Harrell,
M. E. S.age 25(Mary E. S.)

Harrell,
S. T.age5(Selwyn)

Harrell,
J. E.age2(Joseph E.)

John was very active in the Bethlehem Baptist Church which had been established
near the village of Pitch Landing (on the road to Harrellsville) in 1835. In fact, in 1858
John Wilson and David Harrell were among only ten church members who contributed $100.00
each to build a new church [page 175] most others contributed considerably less. He
also served as the Church Clerk from 1860-1871. This service was, of course, interrupted
by the War. John was 29 years old when the War started, but managed to stay close to home
during the first years. By February 12, 1864, he clearly felt the need to get more
directly involved, and wrote into the Church minutes, the following:

This
day I turn over the church books to the assistant clerk, in consequence of my being in the
service of my country. May God, in his wisdom, and goodness, soon restore peace and
harmony to this once happy, but, now distracted land and country, and that He may watch
over me in the vicissitudes of a camp life; and keep me from the evils, and sins, that
doth so easily beset one in the army...

This statement and the census information above, strongly suggests John Wilson had
a pretty good and happy life, at least up to 1864. He enlisted at Hertford County on
October 15, 1864.

John Wilson and Mary E. S. Harrell were still in the County for the 1870 census,
with several more children. In fact, they had four more children since the 1860 census.
They appear to have had a pattern of bringing a child into the world every three
yearsnot even breaking the pattern for the Civil War, with Claudius L. having been
born in 1861, John H. born in 1863, and then, of course, Charles L. in 1866.

1870 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
Jon. W.age 38farmer$900$600page 345

Harrell,
Mary E. S.age
37

Harrell,
Selwyn T. age
15

Harrell,
Joseph E.age 12

Harrell,
Claudius L.age9

Harrell,
John H.age7

Harrell,
Charles L.age4

Harrell,
Eniceage1

John Wilson Harrell and his children, Joseph E. through Enice, were all born in
Hertford County (Selwyn was born in Chowan County). It appears John and Mary had settled
into a comfortable life in Hertford and managed to personally survive the war. Their
economic survival was not so certain.

The economic well-being of John and Marys household took a pretty big hit
from the War. In 1860 they were farmers and had real estate valued at $4,500, and personal
property valued at $20,265. The drop in value for personal property to $600 in 1870
obviously reflects the loss of slaves. The drop in their real estate value reflects more
than depressed pricesit was partly the result of selling 214 acres on January 1,
1870, just before the census was taken. The sale to Mathew Brewer of the acres bounded by
the farm of Watson Lewis, J. W. Harrell, and where the Chinquepin and Wiccacon Creeks join
raised $400.[12] The Agricultural Schedule of
1870 indicates they still had 500 acres, however. The Agricultural Schedule shows John
Wilson farming 100 improved and 400 unimproved acres at that time. Most farmers were
having serious financial problems, and John Wilson and Mary E. S. Harrell appear to have
been no exceptionthey would sell more land.

[page
176]

Times probably continued to be pretty difficult for John and Mary as they had to
sell off their real estate in order to hang on until 1880. The Agricultural Schedule in
1870 stated they had about 500 acres left of their farmafter selling 214 acres in
1870. In February of 1871 they mortgaged about 150 acres of their land to John O. Askew.
The land was part of their home farm as evidenced by the description provided in the deed.
It was bound by the lands of Mathew Brewer and Watson Lewis and was to be approximately
150 acres or a sufficient amount ...of any other part of the plantation where we now
live.[13]They apparently had to do this to show their good
faith and eagerness to settle a note they owed John O. Askew that had come due the
previous month. It was a two year mortgage, due on or before January 1, 1873. The document
was witnessed by John O. Askew and John and Marys oldest son, Selwyn L.
Harrellwho was only 18 years old at the time, and learning some difficult lessons,
no doubt.

1880 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
J. W.age 48farmingHarrellsville

Harrell,
Mary E. S.age
47

Harrell,
Claudeons E.age 19

Harrell,
John H.age 17

Harrell,
Charly L.age 14

By 1880, John Wilson and Mary E. S. Harrells household was diminished by the
coming of age of their two oldest sonsSelwyn T. who was 25 years old, and Joseph E.
age 22 at the time. Neither Selwyn nor Joseph were in the Hertford County census for 1880
or later. John and Mary were still on part of their original farm in the 1880 census, but
they had a new neighbor, Lemuel C. Harrell, who moved from adjacent Northampton County and
bought 330 acres from John and Mary in March of 1872. The deed describes the farm as on
the road leading from Harrellsville to Pitch Landing, then to Wiccacon Creek to M. Brewer
and Moores line ...to a corner for Nicholas Harrell, and M. Brewer.[14]It is curious that the usual description then
included a reference to the corner of Nicholas Harrells farm (another new neighbor),
because the records show Nicholas did not purchase his big farm in this prosperous area
until 1875 (Nicholas must have been leasing the farm before he bought it). In any case,
John W. Harrell, Nicholas J. Harrell (see chapter 8), and Lemuel C. Harrell (see chapter
11) were all close to the same age, and neighbors by 1880. (I have not yet been able to
connect their families, however.) J. W. Harrell, H. D. Godwin, Lemuel Harrell, N. Harrell,
and S. M. Aumack were still living next to one another in 1884.[15]

John
Wilson Harrell may have been in Greensboro, North Carolina in early 1892. Recall that John
Wilson and Mary E. S. Harrell were neighbors with Nicholas J. and Amanda Harrell
throughout the 1870s and 1880s near Pitch Landing in Hertford County. Amanda Taylor
Harrell and Nicholas had just moved to Greensboro when she died there January 29, 1892,
and a local newspaper carried an obituary for her written by J. W. Harrell.
The writer stated that he had known her from early life, and in the Baptist Church at
Harrellsville. (See the section on Nicholas Jefferson Harrell in chapter 8 of this work.)
J. W. Harrell sounds very much like John Wilson Harrellbut I have not been able to
get confirmation.[16]

By 1900,
however, I found John and Mary in Oxford, Granville County. The following information is
in the 1900 Soundex for North Carolina: John W. Harrell age 68, born July 1831, and Mary
E. S. Harrell age 67, born April 1833. They were living on Brand Street in Oxford,
Granville County. (Their entry was said to be in vol. 29, e. d. 57, sheet 6, line 13, but
I checked every household in e. d. 57, and did not find them. I did not find them in the
1910 Soundex for North Carolina.)

John (1804-1810) and Herriet Harrells son, Alpheus, was living with David
Harrell and his family in 1850. There is no indication of his relationship to David
Harrell; he was, however, listed as Idiotic at the time. He was not in
Hertford County after that time.

As with so many of the early residents of Hertford County, there is no clear basis
for determining where George came from. In the earlier sections of this chapter, we
determined that George could have beenElijah
Twos # 1 son, or Elisah Harrells son. The remaining question, of course, is if
he moved from the county or died there. If he spent his last years in the county, then he
could well have left children there. In his only appearance in the Hertford County
records, his family appeared as follows:

1840 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Head of
Household:George Harrell, age 40-50page 6x

household
members: malesfemales

1, 0-51, 20-30

1, 40-501, 30-40

It is hard to say whether the male under the age of 5 was his son, and if the
female age 20 to 29 was his daughterthe spread between the two youngsters ages
is unusually large. One possibility, though a long shot, is that the young male was George
T. Harrell, who will appear in the 1850 census as the son of Delilah Harrellit is
possible that Delilah was Georges widow who married Isaac Harrell between 1840 and
1850. There is no evidence of this other than the use of the name George, and that the
timing was right. (Delilah would have been 27 years old in 1840.)

The case
of Isaac is not dissimilar to that of most of the members of his generationI do not
know where he came from. He was not listed as a head of household in Hertford in 1840, nor
did any Harrell household have a male, non-head of household, age 25 that year.
Nonetheless, if we assume he was a son of a 3rd Generation Hertford County
Harrell, then it is possible he was the son of Elisah, or the 4th son of Elijah
Two, or the 2nd son of Thomas Two (see Table 20, page 177).

Regardless of where Isaac was in
1840, he was with Delilah and her/their children in 1850.

1850 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
Isaacage 35laborer $25.page 334

Harrell,
Delilah age 37

Harrell,
Georgeage 11

Harrell,
James age9

Harrell,
William age7

Harrell,
John age5

When I was discussing the George Harrell household in the 1840 census, I offered
the suggestion that Isaac might have been Delilahs second husband, and she might
have been Georges wife in 1840 (see the section just above). The only reason for
such a proposed connection is the name of Delilahs first son. If, indeed, the
suggestion is correct then at least her oldest son, George T., and perhaps some or all of
the other three children in the 1850 census entry for Isaac and Delilah were also children
of George Harrell.

Isaac
and Delilahs family did not appear to be in Hertford County in 1860. This probably
means that Isaac died before 1860, because Delilah and her son George T. Harrell were
together in Hertford County in 1870 (see the section below on George T. Harrell).

In 1870 Delilah reappeared in Hertford County. She was living with her son George
T. Harrell, but before I discuss that situation, I need to add a dimension to this
storythe probable relationship between Delilah, and the John Harrell (b. 1813)
family which coexisted in 1850 and probably merged in the 1860s.

The only indication that Delilah and John (b. 1813) got together is the marriage
record for her son, William H. Harrell. It states that Delilahs third son, William
H. Harrell, was married on November 12, 1868 in Hertford County to Millie Ann Harrell the
daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth Harrell. The record also lists William as the son of John
and Delilah Harrell.[17] There are a couple of
possible reasons why Williams father was listed as John Harrell. The first is that
in fact Delilahs first husband was a John Harrell who died before the 1850 census,
and before she married Isaac Harrell. There was only one John Harrell who was in the
county in 1840, and who was gone by 1850. It was the John who was born in [page 180]
1804-1810, but that John Harrell left a will in which he named his children and his wife,
Harriethe did not name a son William. So Delilahs first husband was probably
not named John, but her third husband might very well have been. Which gets us to the
second possible reason William might have been referred to as a son of John Harrell on his
marriage record. It was not uncommon to have a marriage record name a step-parent as a
parentespecially if the young persons birth-parent had been dead for a number
of years as was the case with William H. Harrell.

The best candidate for Delilahs third husband was 4th Generation,
John Harrell (b. 1813) from Gates County. After John moved to Hertford County with his
family, then lost his wife, Margaret Spriggins, he may have married Delilah Harrell. That
is why he gets mentioned here. (He is discussed in greater detail in chapter 11.)

The 1870 census shows that Delilah and two of her younger children were living with
her son, George T. Harrell age 33, and his family. That census entry indicates Delilah had
two more children, probably with Isaac. The list of Delilah Harrells children is
also probably the list of George (b. 1791-1800), and Isaac (b. 1815) Harrells
children. The breakdown of the list probably goes as follows:

Delilahs
children with first husband: George T.b. 1837

Jamesb. 1841

Williamb.
1843 (m.1872 or 1868, or both)

John
b. 1845

with
Isaac:Starkeyb.
1852

Mary
E.b.
1855

According
to the 1870 census, her son, William H. at age 27, was head of his own household. Sons,
James D. and John, were also heads of their own household but shared a dwelling in 1870.

George
T.s father was Delilahs first husbandprobably George (b. 1791-1800). The
1870 census entry shows George T.s family was well established at that time.

Delilah was George T.s mother, and the two youngsters listed below her name
were probably her youngest children. Starkey (born 1852) and Mary E. ( born 1855) were
probably children of Isaac Harrell.

George T.s wife, Sarah, died soon after the 1870 census was taken. In 1870 ,
George T. age 33, and wife, Sarah age 33, lived next to Joseph Hoggard age 42 and his
wife, Elizabeth Hoggard, age 45. Apparently Joseph Hoggard also died soon after the 1870
census, because in June of 1873 G. T. Harrell age 35 married Eliz. Hoggard age 40,[18]
almost the girl next door.

1880 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
G. T.age 45farmer

Harrell,
Elizabethage 53

Harrell,
Calvinage 17son/laborer

Harrell,
Charlesage 15son/laborer

Harrell,
Henryage 13son/laborer

Harrell,
Jerome
age 10son/laborer

Hoggard,
Isabellaage 17niece

Harrell,
Nancyage 43sister(b. 1837)

[page
182]

George and his relatively new wife, Elizabeth, had Isabella Hoggard living with
themshe was undoubtedly from Elizabeths family. Nancy Harrell may have been
Georges step-sister, daughter of John Harrell (see 1850 census entry for John [b.
1813] in chapter 11), but she would have been only 35 years old in 1880 not 43this
could have been a case of transposed numbers that should have been 34.

In January 1888, George T. married again at the declared age of 50 years old. He
married Lisa Hoggard age 25, probably the young Isabella Hoggard living with George and
Elizabeth in 1880, and listed as Elizabeths niece. The marriage was witnessed by
Georges brother, J. D. Harrell.[19]

1900 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
George T. age
62shoemakerborn July 1837

Harrell,
Isieage 37wifeborn June 1863

George
and Isie were living in the town of Winton, in their own home free of any mortgage. Isie
states they had been married 10 years, and had 5 children, none of whom were still living
in 1900.

1910 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
Issa age 46widow

In 1910 Isie was a widow living alone in the town of Winton, in a home of her own
with no mortgage.

James D. was living with his parents, Delilah and Isaac Harrell, in 1850. I do not
know if these people are related, but in August 7, 1853, a George T. Harrell was recorded
as marrying Mary Jane Trotmann in Gates County. I suspect this could have been the
marriage of James D. to Mary Jane with brother George T. as a witnessthen a mix-up
in the transcribing occurred. I suspect some sort of recording error because, in 1870,
James D. Harrell was listed with his wife, Mary Jane Harrelltheir household included
the following:

There were obviously two families living in one dwelling. James, his wife and two
children, and his brother, John, and his family. James D. and his wife, Mary, were
apparently temporary residents of Hertford County. They did not own their own farm, and
the family was not in Hertford County for the 1880 census. They were probably nearby,
however, because in January of 1888, J. D. Harrell was a witness at George T.
Harrells marriage to Lisa Hoggard in Hertford County.

William
was with his mother, Delilah, in Isaac Harrells household in 1850 at the age of
seven. Isaac Harrell was probably his father. William Harrell, married Millie Ann Harrell,
daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth Harrell, on November 12, 1868 in Hertford County[20]
(Thomas Three and Elizabeth Harrell are covered as Elijah Twos children earlier in
this chapter). Their young family had the following look in 1870.

[page
184]

1870 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
W. H.age 27farm laborerpage 433

Harrell,
Amelia A.age
20

Harrell,
Thomas H.age
4/12

Harrell,
Elizabethage 50

William H. was a farm laborer with no land of his own. Elizabeth Harrell was Amelia
Anns mother.

W. H.
Harrell was a witness at the wedding of W. J. Harrell (b. 1866) and Mollie Carwell, age
30, on January 23, 1906. It took place at the home of James Phelps and his wife, Nancy
Harrell (b. 1853).

John was with his mother, Delilah, in 1850 in Hertford County, and with her
somewhere in 1860. By 1870 he was married and back in Hertford. John (age 25) and his
wife, Emma (age 24), and daughter, Annie (age 1), were living with his older brother,
James D. Harrell and his family at that time.

By 1880,
John and his wife, E. F. (Emma), were in their own place in the Winton district, and had
apparently lost their daughter, Annie, but had gained two young sons since 1870. Their
household in 1880 was as follows:

Delilah Harrells son, Starkey, was first recorded with her when they were
living with his older brother, George T., in 1870 (his younger sister, Mary E., was also
with them). Starkey was 18 years old at the time. I have not been able to find him since
that citing.

Mary E.
Harrell was first noted in 1870 at the age of 15, living with George T. and her mother,
Delilah. There is a good possibility the young lady in the Overton household in 1880 was
Mary E. Harrell, daughter of Delilah.

1880 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Overton,
Elizabethage
32head

Overton,
Chas.age 11son, laborer

Overton,
Williamage4son

Harrell,
M. E.age 23female, domestic servant

The Mary
E. Harrell, age 25, who married Charles Hill, age 28, in Winton on May 19, 1881 was most
certainly Delilahs daughter. The witnesses were J. S. Shaw, T. W.
Harrell, and E. Love.[21]

John (b. 1810-1820) was another
one of those 4th Generation Harrells who appeared for the 1840 census, and then
not again in the county. John could have been Elijah Twos number 3 sonwhich
means he could have been Enochs younger brother. The latter is a possibility. Enoch
and John lived near each other when they made their one appearance for the 1840 census. It
is also possible, however, that John (b. 1810-1820) was the 1st, 2nd,
or 3rd son of Thomas Harrell Two. The only citing we have for John (b.
1810-1820) is the following:

Joseph (b. 1829) was one of the 4th Generation Harrells who fit the age
category of Eley Harrells fourth son. Joseph and Martha appeared alone in the 1860
census.

1860 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
Josephage 31farmer$600$430page 107

Harrell,
Marthaage 30

Joseph
and Martha both reported they were born in Hertford County, but I did not find a 21 year
old in the county named Joseph in 1850. Joseph and Martha Harrells household was not
in the county for the 1870 census.

William Harrell (b.
1825)4th Generation

William (b. 1825) did not fit any of the age categories for the sons of the 3rd
Generation Harrells considered in this chapteri.e., Eley, Elijah Two, Elisah, or
Thomas Two. He was, however, a good fit for Josiah and Anna Harrells third son.

William was the right age for Josiah and Anna Harrells third son. Their third
son was living with them in 1840, and he would have been 25-29 years of age in
1850he is the best possibility (see chapter 8). In addition to his age, there are
two factors which make it a good possibility. The first is the fact, according to the
families information given in the 1860 census, that William was born in Hertford County.
The second bit of circumstantial evidence that suggest a connection to Josiah and Anna
Harrell also comes from the 1860 censusat that time William was living one dwelling
away from John B. Taylor and his family. John B. Taylors daughter, Amanda, age 12 in
1860, married Josiah and Anna Harrells fifth son, Nicholas J. Harrell, in 1867.
Other probable members of Josiah and Annas family noted that they also had known
Amanda Taylor from a young age (see John Wilson Harrell in the section above).

In any case, William and his young family first appeared in the county records in
the 1850 census. William was a farmer but apparently did not own the land he worked. His
other wealth also seems to have been minimal. Margaret Faincloth was probably his
mother-in-law. The young Mary Taylor is unidentified (she may have been John B.
Taylors younger sister).

[page 187]

1850 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

Harrell,
Williamage 25farmer$45page 317

Harrell,
Mariahage 27

Harrell,
Mary E.age 2

Faincloth,
Margaretage 65

Taylor,
Maryage 23

By 1860, Williams wife, Mariah, was gone, and he apparently had a new young
wife, Mary A., who was also born in Hertford County. In addition to their daughter, Mary
Elizabeth, William and Mariah had two new daughters, M. T. and E. S., listed in the 1860
censusthey were probably twins born in 1852.

1860 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Harrell,
William
age 35farmer$0$25born in Hertford Co.page 124

Harrell,
Mary A.age 19born in Hertford Co.

Harrell,
Eliz.age 12born in Hertford Co.

Harrell,
M. S.age8femaleborn in Hertford Co.

Harrell,
E. S.age8femaleborn in Hertford Co.

William A. Harrell was 37 years old on July 5, 1861 when he enlisted in the C. S.
A.s army as a private in Hertford County. His household does not appear in Hertford
County for the 1870 or 1880 censuses, and there is no strong evidence his daughters
married in the county.

William and Mariah
Harrells Children

Mary Elizabeth Harrell (b.
1848)5th Generation

M. S. Harrell Modlin
(b. 1852)5th Generation

There is a good probability that William and Mariah Harrells daughter married
Frederick A. Modlin on September 19, 1869. The brides name was given as Martha T.
Harrell; her age was given as 20; and her parents were identified as William and Maria
Harrell.[22]
If the age given in the 1860 census was correct, then she was probably closer to 18 when
she marriedif, on the other hand, she was not a twin, and her age in 1860 was closer
to 10, then the age given at her marriage would make sense. The ages recorded for Martha
Harrell Modlin in the 1870 and 1880 censuses yield the following birth years: 1850 and
1851 respectively.

Frederick and Martha Modlin were living next door to Josiah and Anna Harrell in
1870Josiah and Anna, as William (b. 1825) Harrells probable parents, would
have been Marthas probable grandparents. Frederick was identified as the son of
Nathan and Christian Modlin. (I believe Fredericks father was Nathan Harrell Modlin,
who was identified as N. H. Modling in 1860, and Harrell Modlin in the 1870 census. See
the discussion of Josiahs neighbors, the Modlins, in chapter 8.)

[page
188]

1870 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Modlin,
Frederick C.age 20farmer

Modlin,
Marthaage 20

By 1880, Frederick and Martha had three children, and were still farming.

1880 census entry, Hertford Co., N.
C.

Modlin,
Frederickage 29farmer

Modlin,
Martha S. age 29

Modlin,
Alla P.age7daughter

Modlin,
Wm. H.age6son

Modlin,
Joseph L.age2son

Martha S. Harrell and
Frederick Modlins Children

Alla P. Modlin (b.
1873)6th Generation

William H. Modlin (b.
1874)6th Generation

Joseph L. Modlin (b.
1878)6th Generation

E. S. Harrell (b.
1852)(female)5th Generation

I have found no indication of who William (b. 1825) and Mariah Harrells
youngest daughter was, or if she survived childhood.

William Harrell (b.
1830)4th Generation

William (b. 1830) was also possibly the fourth son of Eley Harrell. He was born in
Hertford County as were his wife and three daughters. This William (b. 1830) was five
years younger than the William (b. 1825) described above, but the resemblance of his
families in 1860 is remarkable. An important difference is this William (b. 1830) was only
located in the county for the 1860 census, and not again.

1860 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

Harrell,
William
age 30day laborer$40page 61

Harrell,
Maryage 10daughter

Harrell,
Eliz.age8daughter

Harrell,
Ellenage8daughter

Notes

[1] This was recorded as Grant No. 176, in
Book 142, page 135. It is available as item no. 189 on the microfilm number S.108.736 from
the North Carolina State Archives, Raleigh, North Carolina.

[3] A copy of the family history
information is available in the Bible Collection at the North Carolina State Archives. The
original Bible is in the possession of Rachel Modlin of Ahoskie, North Carolina at the
time of this writing.